Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

gigaom.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 48 posts

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#11

Post by kourt »

bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

It's very typical to more strictly regulate commercial use of the sky than non-commercial. For human aviators, the progression in licenses is Private Pilot (cannot even charge passengers more than their pro-rata share of expenses), Commercial Pilot (can get paid for banner towing, crop dusting, and aerial photography), and Airline Transport Pilot. Aircraft themselves are subject to increasing regulatory burdens regarding maintenance intervals and documentation depending on whether they are for private use (Part 91), Part 135 (charter), or Part 121 (airline).

In broadcasting, amateur radio operators ("hams") are allowed to use the airwaves much more easily than commercial broadcasters.

Perhaps this principle does not translate perfectly to drone operations, but the general goal seems to be to protect both individual liberty and consumers of for-profit service providers.

(Note that contrary to political rhetoric "government regulation hurts business", the viability of the airline industry depends on safety standards: the market has to be larger than "hardcore daredevils" to justify a fleet of 737's.)

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#12

Post by Wingman4l7 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #9
bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

> It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. It is also legal to have sex as a hobby, but not -- in (most of) the U.S., and much of the rest of the world -- if you charge for the services. Actually, there are a lot of things that are legal to do if you aren't charging for a service, but illegal, or at least much more tightly regulated, if you are chargin…

Brewing beer or wine also comes to mind.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#13

Post by mkavuma1 »

biot wrote: post #10
nadiaks wrote: post #3

Here is a link to the original article in the Financial Post ( http://bit.ly/1m1lGdi ) with the due credit to the original author, Quentin Casey, and the companies mentioned in the article, fluttrbox and Resson Aerospace (which is conveniently not mentioned by this author). I am the co-founder of fluttrbox(applied YC W15)

Actual non-Libya URL: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/09/07/canadian-startu...

I've actually seen these guys hustling with drones around the montreal area

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#14

Post by bigiain »

bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

I don't think it's "bizarre" at all - getting paid _fundamentally_ changes things.

Although the "ban commercial use completely" approach is a pretty big hammer to use - as a hobbyist RC pilot who's flown with a camera aboard for some time (http://bigiain.com/Mini-Swift-RC-plane) I've had _many_ requests to take photos/video for other people, many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would require me to make safety compromises that I probably wouldn't choose to make "just doing it for kicks". And the more money on offer, the more tempting it is and the bigger the risks that might get taken.

While _I_ think the risks I take flying that plane in the linked video are reasonable (it weighs ~125g all up, and puts a maximum of about 55W into spinning the prop), I've seen people fly multicopters weighing over 6kg with eight 2000W motors spinning 14inch carbon fiber props in _way_ more public and crowded places than that. I certainly wouldn't choose to do that. And Youtube is full of clips which make me say "Really? You chose to do _that_ _there_? Are you insane?"

I think the "easier learning curve" on things like DJI's gear, coupled with it's accessible price - but _also_ coupled with a bunch of people who either haven't thought through the possible consequences, don't care about the consequences, or who think the money they're making means the risk is worth taking - will inevitably lead to bad decisions being made.

On the more optimistic side, at least _some_ places (here in Australia, for example), it seems like the authorities (CASA in my case) are trying to take account of the differing nature of different "drones", and at least proposing a graduated approach - a sub 500g craft probably isn't going to need to abide by the came rules as a 6kg+ one. (And, if the lower-bound in their current ruleset stays, sub 100g craft will be classified still as "toys" and not covered by these rules.)

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#15

Post by [deleted] »

bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

[deleted]

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#16

Post by baddox »

bigiain wrote: post #14
bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

I don't think it's "bizarre" at all - getting paid _fundamentally_ changes things. Although the "ban commercial use completely" approach is a pretty big hammer to use - as a hobbyist RC pilot who's flown with a camera aboard for some time ( http://bigiain.com/Mini-Swift-RC-plane ) I've had _many_ requests to take photos/video for other people, many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would re…

> many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would require me to make safety compromises that I probably wouldn't choose to make "just doing it for kicks".

And because of that, you're advocating that all commercial drone usage be prohibited? To me, that doesn't follow.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#17

Post by baddox »

dragonwriter wrote: post #9
bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

> It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. It is also legal to have sex as a hobby, but not -- in (most of) the U.S., and much of the rest of the world -- if you charge for the services. Actually, there are a lot of things that are legal to do if you aren't charging for a service, but illegal, or at least much more tightly regulated, if you are chargin…

I oppose all those instances.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#18

Post by MichaelApproved »

biot wrote: post #10
nadiaks wrote: post #3

Here is a link to the original article in the Financial Post ( http://bit.ly/1m1lGdi ) with the due credit to the original author, Quentin Casey, and the companies mentioned in the article, fluttrbox and Resson Aerospace (which is conveniently not mentioned by this author). I am the co-founder of fluttrbox(applied YC W15)

Actual non-Libya URL: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/09/07/canadian-startu...

Reminder that you can see traffic count of bitly links by adding a + to the end of the URL https://bitly.com/1m1lGdi+

43 clicks as of now (10:49PM ET).

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#19

Post by notatoad »

bennesvig wrote: post #5

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use. There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can captu…

if the goal of the commercial use ban is to simply limit the number of things flying around the sky, it makes perfect sense. as soon as you allow drones to be used for commercial purposes, the number of them will skyrocket. a couple of hobbyists flying their toys around isn't going to cause problems, the tacocopter lunch rush could be a big problem.

Re: Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

#20

Post by [deleted] »

baddox wrote: post #16
bigiain wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's "bizarre" at all - getting paid _fundamentally_ changes things. Although the "ban commercial use completely" approach is a pretty big hammer to use - as a hobbyist RC pilot who's flown with a camera aboard for some time ( http://bigiain.com/Mini-Swift-RC-plane ) I've had _many_ requests to take photos/video for other people, many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would re…

> many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would require me to make safety compromises that I probably wouldn't choose to make "just doing it for kicks". And because of that, you're advocating that all commercial drone usage be prohibited? To me, that doesn't follow.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN